JHA / JSA / AHA builderStructural Concrete Spall Repair JHA
A JHA breaks the work into steps, hazards and controls. Use this example to build a draft for your actual job and review it with your crew.
Just need the example? Download it here.For the crew
You know the work. Let’s turn that experience into a plan your crew can talk through. Start with today’s job, then check the steps together.
Let’s build your JHA.
Step 1 of 4 · Working draft
Your job
Tell Jenkins what you’re planning and where the work will happen. Use the actual job details.
Use the published example’s suggestions when they fit your task, or write your own steps. These are planned controls, not verified worksite conditions.
Describe an observable step, how someone could be harmed, and the control that acts on that hazard. Identify who checks it and what evidence is needed.
Walk through the plan with the people doing the work. Resolve missing controls and agree who checks them. Moving to the next step does not approve the work.
Confirm people, equipment and emergency arrangements
Record changes, checks, and open actions
Walk the work area, review with the crew, and resolve missing controls. Follow the required approval process. This tool does not judge completeness, verify signatures or authorize work.
Print your own JHA by signing in, or contribute the selected structured categories as a guest. Signing in does not require research participation. Written job details are processed to prepare your export and are stored on our server only if you save to your private company library.
Research purpose, data fields, retention and withdrawal · Privacy notice
Sign-in uses a free account. Your tab draft is retained for the return from sign-in.
Hosted organization saving requires active jSMS access and a company workspace. View jSMS plans.
The export uses landscape pages, task-only continuation pages and a Page X of Y footer in current Chrome or Edge. Review every page. Opening an export is not proof that the JHA was printed or used. The PDF includes its research choice and reference; the private withdrawal link stays in the export’s screen-only receipt.
Device storage and other draft options
Device copies may contain private job information. Clear them when using a shared device.
Your entries stay in this working draft as you move between steps. Required field checks, employer review and work authorization remain separate.
Your Structural Concrete Spall Repair JHA
Walk through the job in order. Use these possible hazards, planned controls and checks to start a conversation about your actual work.
011. Release the repair detail and work boundary
Possible hazards: Removing damaged concrete without a structural assessment can further weaken the member.
Planned controls: Repair lead obtains the current condition assessment, repair detail and staged support/removal requirements. Mark the approved area and protect adjacent access. Resolve unknown services or materials and assign the responsible technical contact before disturbance.
Check before work: Lead compares the marked repair with current design and support documents.
022. Establish support and preparation controls
Possible hazards: Support interference, dust or flying fragments can harm workers before the repair material is applied.
Planned controls: Install and accept any specified temporary support under its separate engineered method. Set the repair boundary and use the exposure-control plan for the actual cutting or chipping tools, with fragment, noise and adjacent-worker protection. Maintain supported access and waste collection.
Check before work: Assigned reviewer checks support status; silica competent person verifies the chosen preparation controls.
033. Remove concrete within the released limits
Possible hazards: Overbreak or aggressive contact with retained reinforcement can change the remaining section and load path.
Planned controls: Trained crew removes only the marked unsound material with the specified controlled method. Protect retained bars, concrete and supports. Pause when removal reveals deeper damage, moving material, uncharted reinforcement or a condition outside the assessed scope; obtain a revised technical decision before enlarging the repair.
Check before work: Repair lead records actual exposed conditions and compares them with the release limits.
044. Prepare and accept the repair interface
Possible hazards: Unaccepted bar loss or an inadequately prepared substrate can leave the repair unable to perform its intended function.
Planned controls: Prepare the retained reinforcement and concrete interface to the current repair specification. Present the exposed area at the specified inspection hold point; record findings and resolve required treatment or bar-condition decisions before covering the work. Do not invent a universal permissible corrosion loss.
Check before work: Responsible reviewer records interface and reinforcement findings against project acceptance criteria.
055. Mix and apply the specified repair
Possible hazards: Wrong material, uncontrolled mixing dust and cement contact can injure workers and compromise the repair.
Planned controls: Use the identified product, approved batches and measured preparation under its instructions. Control bag-opening and mixing exposure, protect skin and eyes and provide washing. Place within the specified thickness and application requirements without substituting additives or covering unresolved findings.
Check before work: Repair lead checks product and batch records, application conditions and required material observations.
066. Cure and preserve restrictions
Possible hazards: Early loading or removal of support can damage an incompletely accepted repair.
Planned controls: Protect and cure the repair using the actual specification and product instructions. Record the required conditions and acceptance results and maintain support and access restrictions until the responsible release is documented. Collect debris with the planned dust-control method and hand over open actions.
Check before work: Responsible reviewer checks the required curing/acceptance evidence and states the actual release limits.
Example scope and starting conditions
A specialist repair crew will carry out a localized engineer-specified spall repair on a ground-level reinforced-concrete building member. The released limits and temporary-support plan govern removal of unsound concrete, preparation around identified reinforcement and placement of the specified cementitious repair material. Exposed-bar replacement or redesign is not part of this example. This fictional learning example describes planned controls; it records no actual inspection or work authorization.
- A responsible engineer/designer assesses the damage, establishes the repair detail and specifies any required support and staged removal limits before disturbance.
- The substrate, coatings, embedded services, preparation tools, silica controls and actual repair product are identified for the work; unresolved suspect materials remain undisturbed.
- This is partial coverage of concrete repair and patching. Cosmetic wall finishing, overhead repairs, reinforcement replacement, large-section reconstruction and unassessed structural distress are excluded.
Know when to pause
- Removal exposes damage, bar condition or embedded items outside the released repair assumptions.
- Temporary support moves, damaged material becomes unstable or the silica controls cannot be maintained.
- Product, application conditions or curing/acceptance evidence differs from the repair specification.
After a pause, correct the condition, reassess the work, and obtain required authorization before restarting.
Free example and template
No account required. The worked example contains planned controls. The blank template is for your own work; neither includes fabricated inspection results, signatures or approval.
Worked exampleNeed help? Ask Jenkins
Jenkins · Your Safety Concierge
What brings you here today? Choose what you’re working on, or tell Jenkins about your situation.
Jenkins matches your words to published starting points. Keep names and private job details in your working draft. Suitable free resources come first.
For managers
Does the team have what it needs to carry out the plan? Give the crew time, equipment and support, and make it clear who will resolve anything that is missing.
Manager checks and supporting resources
Confirm the people doing the work have the time, equipment, information and support to carry out the plan. Agree who checks the controls and who resolves open actions.
Questions to resolve before work
- Who establishes the permissible removal limits and the temporary load path while this member is being repaired?
- What happens if the exposed reinforcement or damage extends beyond the released repair assumptions?
- Which preparation, material acceptance and curing records govern the eventual load or access release?
Training and qualifications to confirm
- Project-specific repair instruction covering marked removal limits, preserved reinforcement, temporary support and the point at which unexpected findings require designer review.
- Task-specific silica-control and repair-product instruction, including tool compatibility, cement contact protection, mixing, application and specified curing records.
Confirm the actual training evidence for the assigned people. A toolbox talk does not establish competence.
Decisions that change the plan
Why is this separate from the cosmetic sack-and-patch example?
That example excludes structural repairs and sends exposed reinforcement or structural distress for technical review. This scope begins with that assessment and a released repair detail, preserving the temporary load path through controlled section repair and acceptance.
What must the crew record for actual use?
Record the member and damage assessment, current repair and support revisions, marked removal limits, preparation tools and exposure controls, actual reinforcement/interface findings, product batches and application records, curing/acceptance evidence and remaining load or support restrictions.
Keep planning connected
Resources that support this JHA
Additional tools for task planning and safe work. Start with the free resources; explore paid options only when they meet an additional need.
Toolbox talks for the work
Prepare a practical crew discussion.
Silica: Verify Dust Controls Before Cutting →Building Safety: Report the Defect and Protect the Area →Wet Concrete: Prevent Skin and Eye Contact →
Safety program resources
Review procedures, roles, and requirements.
Browse the existing catalog and confirm the scope and purchase availability of each program.
Browse safety programs →
Paid service · Availability
Task-specific training and qualifications
Explore applicable training and qualification needs.
Task-specific training services are not currently available to book here. Start with the free training-needs lookup; a toolbox talk or online course alone does not establish competence or employer authorization.
Review training needs · Free →People, equipment, emergency arrangements and open actions are recorded in the guided JHA’s Crew review step.
Open the crew review step →For safety professionals
How do we know the planning process and controls are working? Connect what the crew reports with field checks, risk decisions and the evidence behind your system.
Industry context, SIF, control verification and AHA review
Guidance and evidence
Review the method, risk decisions and evidence behind the plan. Use the actual jurisdiction, equipment instructions, employer process and project requirements.
Task-by-task control and verification rationale
1. Release the repair detail and work boundary
Hazard: Removing damaged concrete without a structural assessment can further weaken the member.
Control: Repair lead obtains the current condition assessment, repair detail and staged support/removal requirements. Mark the approved area and protect adjacent access. Resolve unknown services or materials and assign the responsible technical contact before disturbance.
Verification: Lead compares the marked repair with current design and support documents.
Why this belongs in the analysis: The extent that looks damaged is not automatically the extent permitted for removal.
2. Establish support and preparation controls
Hazard: Support interference, dust or flying fragments can harm workers before the repair material is applied.
Control: Install and accept any specified temporary support under its separate engineered method. Set the repair boundary and use the exposure-control plan for the actual cutting or chipping tools, with fragment, noise and adjacent-worker protection. Maintain supported access and waste collection.
Verification: Assigned reviewer checks support status; silica competent person verifies the chosen preparation controls.
Why this belongs in the analysis: Structural restraint and exposure protection must be in place before the surface is opened.
3. Remove concrete within the released limits
Hazard: Overbreak or aggressive contact with retained reinforcement can change the remaining section and load path.
Control: Trained crew removes only the marked unsound material with the specified controlled method. Protect retained bars, concrete and supports. Pause when removal reveals deeper damage, moving material, uncharted reinforcement or a condition outside the assessed scope; obtain a revised technical decision before enlarging the repair.
Verification: Repair lead records actual exposed conditions and compares them with the release limits.
Why this belongs in the analysis: Unexpected findings are information for the designer, not permission to keep breaking.
4. Prepare and accept the repair interface
Hazard: Unaccepted bar loss or an inadequately prepared substrate can leave the repair unable to perform its intended function.
Control: Prepare the retained reinforcement and concrete interface to the current repair specification. Present the exposed area at the specified inspection hold point; record findings and resolve required treatment or bar-condition decisions before covering the work. Do not invent a universal permissible corrosion loss.
Verification: Responsible reviewer records interface and reinforcement findings against project acceptance criteria.
Why this belongs in the analysis: Once filled, the critical interface is harder to see and correct.
5. Mix and apply the specified repair
Hazard: Wrong material, uncontrolled mixing dust and cement contact can injure workers and compromise the repair.
Control: Use the identified product, approved batches and measured preparation under its instructions. Control bag-opening and mixing exposure, protect skin and eyes and provide washing. Place within the specified thickness and application requirements without substituting additives or covering unresolved findings.
Verification: Repair lead checks product and batch records, application conditions and required material observations.
Why this belongs in the analysis: A similar-looking patch product may not meet the engineered repair requirements.
6. Cure and preserve restrictions
Hazard: Early loading or removal of support can damage an incompletely accepted repair.
Control: Protect and cure the repair using the actual specification and product instructions. Record the required conditions and acceptance results and maintain support and access restrictions until the responsible release is documented. Collect debris with the planned dust-control method and hand over open actions.
Verification: Responsible reviewer checks the required curing/acceptance evidence and states the actual release limits.
Why this belongs in the analysis: Surface hardness or elapsed time alone does not establish repaired-member capacity.
Compare control wording
| Needs improvement | More useful for this scenario |
|---|---|
| Chip back to sound concrete and patch it. | Crew follows the engineer’s marked limits and controlled removal method; unexpected depth or reinforcement findings stop work for a revised decision. |
| It is hard, so take the shores out. | Responsible reviewer assesses the specified acceptance evidence and separately documents the permitted loading and support-release conditions. |
Common questions
Can this example be used as a JSA?
Adapt its Task | Hazard | Control analysis to the employer’s JSA format and the actual work. Confirm the assigned checks and record real findings before relying on the plan.
What changes if the project requires an AHA?
Use the project’s governing AHA format, risk method, supporting records and acceptance process. The published formwork AHA illustrates that additional structure; this JHA does not establish an AHA risk rating or acceptance.
Are these resources part of a paid course?
This walkthrough, browser draft builder and downloads are free public resources, separate from Academy course enrollment.
References and source note
- ACI RAP Bulletin6 Vertical and Overhead Spall Repair by Hand Application
- OSHA 1926.1153 Respirable crystalline silica
- OSHA Preventing Skin Problems from Working with Portland Cement
Original instructional scenario with planned controls. Primary references support hazard planning. Use actual equipment and product instructions, project design and employer requirements to establish field criteria. This example supplies no inspection findings or work authorization. Use actual equipment instructions and site requirements alongside these references. Reference review: October 9, 2026.
Developed by Todd Jerome Jenkins, MS, CSP · Edition v1.0 · October 13, 2026
Use the builder’s Print / Save as PDF action after signing in or accepting research participation.